alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 13.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

In connection with the annual report of Dunxin Financial Holdings Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2018 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned officer does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to such officer’s knowledge:

 

|   | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |

 

| Date: May 15, 2019 |   | */s/ Chee Jiong Ng*     |   |
|--------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|               | Name:  | Chee Jiong Ng           |   |
|               | Title: | Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
NUMBER 13-18-00510-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN RE SHANE MATTHEW BUCHEL

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa1

Shane Matthew Buchel, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in 

the above cause2 through which he contends that the trial court erred by failing to 

“consolidate restitution.” Buchel argues that the trial court incorrectly allowed the 

collection of restitution for multiple cases according to each individual judgment and its 

corresponding order to withdraw funds from his inmate trust account cases, even though 

 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not 

required to do so.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).

2 This original proceeding arises from trial court cause number 15-11-12,315 in the 24th District 

Court of DeWitt County, Texas. The respondent in this original proceeding is the Honorable Kemper 

Stephen Williams. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.2. 
2

the restitution was ordered in connection with concurrent sentences. This Court 

requested and received a response to the petition for writ of mandamus from the State of 

Texas, acting by and through the District Attorney for DeWitt County, Texas. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 52.8(a),(b). 

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, 

the response, and the applicable law, is of the opinion that the petition for writ of 

mandamus should be denied for the reasons expressed in our opinion in In re Shane 

Matthew Buchel, No. 13-18-00509-CR, 2018 WL ___, at *_ (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 

Dec. 6, 2018, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication), available at

http: //www.search.txcourts.gov/case.aspx?cn=13-18-00509-CR&coa=coa13. 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d). We 

likewise deny Buchel’s motion for nihil dicit judgment.

LETICIA HINOJOSA

Justice 

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 

6th day of December, 2018.
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# Yours in trust : we must protect it from fire

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  Yours in trust : we must protect it from fire 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  United States. Forest Service 
                    -           Publisher        
                    -  U.S. G.P.O 
                    -           Description        
                    -  How to prevent forest fires.Two men stand on a rock looking at a forest while men dig a trench to fight a forest fire in the background. 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1930-1940 
                    -           Subject: Place        
                    -  United States 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  158 × 35 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Zeutschel OS 12000 Scanner at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at the University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu. 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -
**EXHIBIT 99.16**

 

**CONSENT OF ERIC ROTH**

 

Reference is made to the Annual InformationForm (“AIF”) of Extorre Gold Mines Limited (the “Company”), which contains certain scientific and technicalinformation related the Company’s Cerro Moro property, for which, unless otherwise specifically noted in the AIF, I was responsiblefor the preparation.

 

I hereby consent to the inclusion of referencesto my name in the Annual Report on Form 40-F of the Company, which is being filed with the United States Securities and ExchangeCommission.

  

Dated this April 2, 2012.
# C_2007211EN.01005702.xml

| 8.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/57

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2007 — Total v OHIM — Peterson (Beverly Hills Formula TOTAL PROTECTION)

(Case T-326/06) (1)

1

(2007/C 211/106)

Language of the case: English

Language of the case: English

The President of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.

1

---
# C_2007211EN.01001801.xml

| 8.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/18

---

Action brought on 15 June 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-292/07)

(2007/C 211/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Stromsky and D. Kukovec, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| 1. | Declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (1), the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 80 of that directive;
  In the alternative: | declare that, by failing to notify the Commission of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 80 of that directive; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (1), the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 80 of that directive;

1

In the alternative:

declare that, by failing to notify the Commission of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 80 of that directive;

| 2. | order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition of Directive 2004/18/EC expired on 31 January 2006.

---

(1)  OJ L 134, p. 114.

1

---
# C_2008001EN.01000301.xml

| 4.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 1/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 1/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

2 January 2008

(2008/C 1/03)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4688 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 163,83 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4552 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,7413 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,4257 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6529 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 91,99 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9855 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,364 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 253,22 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6988 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,6013 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,583 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 33,586 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,7134 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6673 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4515 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,4731 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8949 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1135 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 376,19 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,0143 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,7125 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3363 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 777,34 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8625 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 60,47 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 35,947 |
| THB | Thai baht | 44,013 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,601 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,0143 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4688

JPY

Japanese yen

163,83

DKK

Danish krone

7,4552

GBP

Pound sterling

0,7413

SEK

Swedish krona

9,4257

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6529

ISK

Iceland króna

91,99

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9855

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,364

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

253,22

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6988

PLN

Polish zloty

3,6013

RON

Romanian leu

3,583

SKK

Slovak koruna

33,586

TRY

Turkish lira

1,7134

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6673

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4515

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,4731

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8949

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1135

KRW

South Korean won

1 376,19

ZAR

South African rand

10,0143

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,7125

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3363

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 777,34

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8625

PHP

Philippine peso

60,47

RUB

Russian rouble

35,947

THB

Thai baht

44,013

BRL

Brazilian real

2,601

MXN

Mexican peso

16,0143

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
#### Maggie Tyrrell *v.*James York.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied.
Case *No.*7,963.

#### The LA BRUCE.

[1 Adm. Rec. 84.]

Superior Court, Florida.

Nov. 18, 1837.

Salvage — Taking Possession op Vessel against Mastep.’s Protest — Brought into Nearest Port.

[Cited in The El Dorado. 50 Fed. 956. to the point that if the master insists on having the vessel taken by its salvors into a distant port, inconvenient for the salvors, without first satisfying their demands, then they are justified in going so far as to resist him. take control of the ship, take it into a convenient port, and place it in the custody of the law.]

The La Bruce, Nathaniel Gladding, master, of Bristol, R. L, ran on Pickle’s Reef near Key West She was gotten off by the libel-ants [William Eagan, James Curry, Joseph Bethel, and others], who were the masters and crews of three wrecking sloops. As the time the schooner was gotten off, the sea was running high, and she was thumping badly. A part of her sheathing was beaten off, and her forefoot started. The salvors took off her deck load, and crowded her over the reef. They then insisted on taking her into Key West for adjudication of salvage. The master, Gladding, objected and offered to pay them for their trouble, claiming that his vessel was able to proceed on her voyage to Charleston. Against the protests of the master, the vessel was taken into Key West and a libel filed. It was claimed by the master that he told the libelants not to assist him. except they agreed that in case his vessel was gotten off in a seaworthy condition he might proceed on his voyage after paying them for their services. He claimed that he could have gotten'his ship off the reef himself, by throwing overboard his deck load, which he intended to do rather than give her up to the management of the salvors, except under the implied agreement to allow him to proceed in case he was able to do so. The agreement was denied by the libelants, who insisted that *906they had a right to bring the vessel into Key West for the adjudication of salvage.

lipón a hearing of the case THE COURT (WEBB, J.) gave $1200 salvage.
Reap. Dec. 10188.

#### Borneo-Sumatra Trading Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

reappraisement R60/12967.

Reappraisement dismissed January 9, 1962. Entered at New York, N.Y. (Not published.) Motion by plaintiff.
FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL EASLEY; STEPHANIA 

SESSION, 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

 v. 

CITY OF RIVERSIDE; SERGIO DIAZ; 

SILVIO MACIAS; DOES, 1 to 10, 

inclusive, 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-55941 

D.C. No. 

5:14-cv-00117-TJH-SP 

Central District of California, 

Riverside 

ORDER

THOMAS, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that 

this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) 

and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition in this case shall not be 

cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. 

Judges Watford and R. Nelson did not participate in the deliberations or vote 

in this case.

FILED

NOV 15 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8882 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8882

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat amounts paid for 
    private umbilical cord blood, or umbilical cord tissue, banking 
                   services as medical care expenses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 28, 2024

 Mr. Arrington (for himself and Mr. Panetta) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat amounts paid for 
    private umbilical cord blood, or umbilical cord tissue, banking 
                   services as medical care expenses.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Family Cord Blood Banking Act''.

SEC. 2. AMOUNTS PAID FOR PRIVATE UMBILICAL CORD BLOOD, OR UMBILICAL 
              CORD TISSUE, BANKING SERVICES TREATED AS MEDICAL CARE 
              EXPENSES.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 213(d) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (defining medical care) is amended by striking 
``or'' at the end of subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the 
end of subparagraph (D) and inserting ``, or'', and by inserting after 
subparagraph (D) the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(E) for private umbilical cord blood, or 
                umbilical cord tissue, banking services provided by any 
                accredited bank which is in compliance with the 
                regulations under section 361 of the Public Health 
                Service Act (42 U.S.C. 264).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2023.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32

Securities
and Exchange Commission
Judiciary Plaza
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies
and Gentlemen:

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of TEL Offshore Trust (the "Trust") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2017 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:



The
above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a
separate disclosure document.



The Bank of New York Mellon
Trust Company, N.A.,
Corporate Trustee for TEL Offshore TrustDate: May 15, 2017

By:

/s/ MICHAEL J. ULRICH Michael J. Ulrich Vice President


---



QuickLinks
# C_2007170EN.01002502.xml

| 21.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 170/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 170/25

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 14 May 2007 — Czigàny and Others v Commission

(Case T-149/04) (1)

1

(Staff cases - Officials - Reports procedure - Career development review - 2001/2002 Appraisal exercise - Action manifestly inadmissible and manifestly devoid of any legal basis)

(2007/C 170/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Imre Czigàny (Rhode-Saint-Genèse, Belgium); Isabel Alves (Luxembourg, Luxembourg); Georgette Henningsen (Brussels, Belgium); and Michel Lucas (Tervuren, Belgium) (represented by: initially G. Bounéou and F. Frabetti, lawyers, and subsequently by F. Frabetti alone)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and H. Krämer, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Application for annulment, principally, of the 2001/2002 appraisal exercise in relation to the applicants; and, alternatively, of the applicants' career development reviews for that exercise.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as partly manifestly inadmissible and, for the rest, as manifestly devoid of any legal basis. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as partly manifestly inadmissible and, for the rest, as manifestly devoid of any legal basis.

| 2. | The applicants are ordered to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicants are ordered to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 168, 26.6.2004.

1

---
# C_2007283EN.01004402.xml

| 24.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 283/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/44

---

Action brought on 17 September 2007 — Acosta Iborra and Others v Commission

(Case F-93/07)

(2007/C 283/80)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Acosta Iborra and Others (Alkmaar, Netherlands) (represented by: N. Lhoëst, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Tribunal should:

| — | annul the decision of the appointing authority publishing the list of officials promoted under the 2006 promotion procedure, in so far as the Commission did not take into account the applicants' eligibility for promotion in respect of the 2006 promotion procedure and in so far as their names are not included on the list of promoted officials; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the appointing authority publishing the list of officials promoted under the 2006 promotion procedure, in so far as the Commission did not take into account the applicants' eligibility for promotion in respect of the 2006 promotion procedure and in so far as their names are not included on the list of promoted officials;

| — | so far as necessary, annul the Commission's express decisions of 6 June 2007 rejecting the complaint brought by the applicants under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (‘the Staff Regulations’) on 16 February 2007; |
| --- | --- |

—

so far as necessary, annul the Commission's express decisions of 6 June 2007 rejecting the complaint brought by the applicants under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (‘the Staff Regulations’) on 16 February 2007;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants are relying on very similar pleas to those advanced in Case F-92/07, the notice for which is published in the same issue of the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

---